2 Stocks That Are Wasting Your Money

According to Boston University finance professor Allen Michel, when a company announces it's buying back stock, that stock tends to outperform the market by 2%-4% more than it otherwise would have over the ensuing six months.

But over the long term, multiple studies show that buybacks actually destroy shareholder value. CNBC pundit Jim Cramer cites the example of big banks that bought back shares in 2007-2008 -- just before their stocks fell off a cliff. Far from buy signals, Cramer calls buybacks "a false sign of health ... and often a waste of shareholders' money." Indeed, the Financial Times recently warned: "The implied returns over a period from buy-backs by big companies would have been laughed out of the boardroom if they had been proposed for investment in ... conventional projects."

So why run buybacks at all? According to FT, management can use them to goose per-share earnings, which helps CEOs earn bonuses based on "performance." Also, the investment banks that run buybacks earn income and fees from promoting them. But you and me? Unless the purchase price is less than the shares' intrinsic value, we miss out.

And we're about to miss out again.

Two bad buybacks
StreetInsider.com keeps a running tally of which companies are buying back stock, and how much they're spending. SI is too polite to accuse companies of wasting shareholders' money, of course -- but I'm not. With SI's help, I've uncovered two examples of popular stocks that I believe are squandering shareholder dollars on ill-timed buybacks...and one stock that isn't.

Chipotle Mexican Grill (NYSE: CMG  )
First up, Chipotle Mexican Grill. When Chipotle missed on earnings last month, the stock sold off -- for all of one day. News that management was planning to buy back $100 million worth of shares, however, soon brought investors around, and sent the shares soaring once more. Personally, though, I had the opposite reaction. Sales and earnings growth of 24% looked like fine results to me. The problem at Chipotle, I thought, was that management was spending too much to buy back its own shares.

Consider: Chipotle may well meet Wall Street's 21% annual growth target. Indeed, the Street's been surprisingly accurate on its predictions so far, landing within a percentage point or two of Chipotle's actual earnings numbers. But that's just the problem. Twenty-one percent long-term growth, if accurate, doesn't justify the 58 times earnings multiple attached to Chipotle shares. It doesn't even justify the 47 times multiple to Chipotle's free cash flow.

Long story short, I love the burritos, I love the business -- but Chipotle's stock is just plain too expensive to justify a buyback.

Rentech (NYSE: RTK  )
A more egregious instance of misuse of shareholder capital can be found at Rentech. A couple of months ago, I explained why subsidiary Rentech Nitrogen Partners (NYSE: RNF  ) offered investors a better bargain than its parent company. While Rentech was beginning to show signs that it might become a viable business, Rentech Nitrogen was already a veritable cash machine.

Unfortunately, it seems Rentech management never read that column. Last month, the synfuel specialist announced a plan to spend $25 million buying shares. It wasn't buying its undervalued subsidiary, though, but its overvalued self. Here's why this is a problem: Burdened by $70 million in net debt, unprofitable, and free-cash-flow negative, Rentech needs all the cash it's got to keep its business going. It's in no position to waste money buying overvalued shares. Rentech's subsidiary, however, is not just profitable, but generates far more free cash flow than even its income statement suggests. Last year, reported income was $24.9 million, but Rentech Nitrogen produced cash profit in excess of $66 million.

Given my druthers, I know which stock I'd buy -- and indeed, I've publicly recommended Rentech Nitrogen over its parent company on Motley Fool CAPS. (It's outperformed both Rentech proper and the S&P 500 index since I recommended it, by the way.)

A better use of cash
Now, I don't like to end this column on a down note, and fortunately, I have spotted one company out there that's spending its shareholders' money prudently: data storage specialist VMware (NYSE: VMW  ) . Just last week, VMware declared an intention to buy back $600 million worth of its stock between now and the end of next year. I think that's a fine idea.

Priced at 59 times earnings, VMware looks expensive -- but really it isn't. You see, VMware generates free cash at more than twice the rate it reports net income, and it's piled up a heaping helping of cash in its bank account already. Result: The enterprise value-to-free cash flow on this stock is only 21.6, comfortably below analysts' expected 24% growth rate.

I still believe that parent company EMC (NYSE: EMC  ) offers a better bargain than VMware, mind you. I've publicly endorsed that one, too, and my pick is beating the market handily. But EMC's subsidiary is safe to own as well. Management's getting a good bargain on VMware shares -- and you can, too.

Looking for more great stocks priced at "buyable" prices? You're in luck, because we've just found five of them. Read all about it in the Fool's new -- and free! -- report: "5 Stocks The Motley Fool Owns -- And You Should Too."

The Motley Fool owns shares of EMC and Chipotle Mexican Grill, and Motley Fool newsletter services have recommended buying shares of VMware and Chipotle Mexican Grill, but Fool contributor Rich Smith does not own (or short) shares of any company named above. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Fools may not all hold the same opinions, but we all believe that considering a diverse range of insights makes us better investors.


Read/Post Comments (2) | Recommend This Article (5)

Comments from our Foolish Readers

Help us keep this a respectfully Foolish area! This is a place for our readers to discuss, debate, and learn more about the Foolish investing topic you read about above. Help us keep it clean and safe. If you believe a comment is abusive or otherwise violates our Fool's Rules, please report it via the Report this Comment Report this Comment icon found on every comment.

  • Report this Comment On March 06, 2012, at 12:54 AM, KiyzerSoSay wrote:

    This has got to be the worst, least researched article I have seen on MF in a while.. Speaking about RTK (disclosure, long) Not only do they have over $100M in cash (which is clear from doing basic research on pretty much any item of company news in the last 4 months, as well as being a topic at the latest CC 'what to do with all our extra cash') but a buyback does the very thing the author criticizes them for not doing.. buying shares of RNF. Because RTK owns 60% of RNF, but RTK's shares are deeply discounted, buying RTK is like buying RNF... but at a fraction of the cost.

    Then, the arrogance displayed with this quote "Unfortunately, it seems Rentech management never read that (i.e. "my") column..." is just beyond the pale given how factually wrong the author is.

    When the next 10-k (which is apparently all this author reads) is filed, all of this will be reflected... and while the author might act like this is 'news' readers should know that here and now, 3-6-12, before any 10-k, all of this information is public and readily available.... and was available well before the writing of this article.

    While the author professes little financial knowledge, in this case that is no excuse. Any layman with a calculator doing less than 1/2 hr of basic research could see that the numbers and facts put forth in this article are wrong.

    Hate a company if you will. Opinions are one thing, but misinformation is quite another. TMF needs to distinguish between the two, and should seriously consider having some site-wide standards for the latter.

  • Report this Comment On March 16, 2012, at 3:07 AM, KiyzerSoSay wrote:

    Surprise Surprise..... Who could have ever seen this coming? 10-k filing time, just like I said last week.

    Please note that in this article, the author says:

    =====

    "Burdened by $70 million in net debt"

    "free-cash-flow negative"

    =====

    Now have a quick glance at the 10-k that was filed today, paying particular attention to 1.(cash -debt), and 2. Cash flow.

    Here's a little figure to get you started:

    Net Increase (Decrease) in Cash

    $ 116,269,000

    Once again, All of this information was available when this article was written.

    Really, I'm sure the author is a great guy and all. Nothing personal here, but how has this entire article not been retracted yet?

Add your comment.

Sponsored Links

Leaked: Apple's Next Smart Device
(Warning, it may shock you)
The secret is out... experts are predicting 458 million of these types of devices will be sold per year. 1 hyper-growth company stands to rake in maximum profit - and it's NOT Apple. Show me Apple's new smart gizmo!

DocumentId: 1800509, ~/Articles/ArticleHandler.aspx, 10/21/2014 6:32:34 AM

Report This Comment

Use this area to report a comment that you believe is in violation of the community guidelines. Our team will review the entry and take any appropriate action.

Sending report...


Advertisement